Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Is two-dimensional field definition sufficient for pelvic node coverage in rectal cancer compared to technical three-dimensional definition?

  • Maria Antonietta Gambacorta
  • , Danilo Pasini
  • , Bruce Daniel Minsky
  • , Stefano Arcangeli
  • , Alice Mannocci
  • , Maria Cristina Barba
  • , Brunella Barbaro
  • , Stefania Manfrida
  • , Mario Balducci
  • , Vincenzo Valentini
  • University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

To assess the effectiveness of the potential advantages with 3-dimensional-based treatment planning versus 2-dimensional pelvic bone-based treatment planning in patients with rectal cancer, controlled for clinical stage.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)191-198
Number of pages8
JournalTumori
Volume99
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Keywords

  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Imaging, Three-Dimensional
  • Lymph Nodes
  • Lymphatic Metastasis
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Neoplasm Staging
  • Pelvis
  • Radiotherapy Dosage
  • Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted
  • Radiotherapy, Conformal
  • Rectal Neoplasms

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Is two-dimensional field definition sufficient for pelvic node coverage in rectal cancer compared to technical three-dimensional definition?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this